FEI

A very quick look at FEI's advanced stats demonstrates palpably how much improvement Harbaugh has brought to Michigan (click to embiggen):

Quick explanation:

Y axis is rank, X axis is year.

Blue is GE = game efficiency, FEI's measure of net success on non-garbage possessions, and opponent adjustments are calculated with special emphasis placed on quality performances against good teams, win or lose

After perusing some of the matchup results for the upcoming MSU @ UM game available on the new CFB Matchup Tool site, I found that it includes results for Special Teams based on the FEI Model (which we know FBO won't post anything until next week). The results are quite stunning, while at the same time giving some measure of validation to the general consensus in these parts that the UM Special Teams are indeed "special" (e.g. coffin-corner punts, only 2 punt touchbacks, fair-catches or returns on everything, and returning KO's for TD's), and the MSU Special Teams are just plain poo-stinky (check out Q1 of the Rutgers game and you'll get an idea).

Anyway, I give you the overall STE chart which aggregates all of the ST factors (kickoffs & returns, punts & returns, field goals) into an equivalent points-based metric, along with rankings. The raw numbers indicate a +10.5 point differential in UM's favor, with adjusted numbers citing a more modest +6.2 point edge.

I'm thinking if the offense doesn't get anything going, maybe we should just punt on 1st down, let the defense turn around a 3 & out, and kick field goals all day long.

Now that I've achieved the magical 100-pt. threshhold for my account, I can actually create a new post instead of merely replying to prior content. Woohoo!

So without further adieu, here's a table I first ginned up after week 3 (before the BYU game) that gives a comparison of the advanced stats discussed above (the root sources coming from Football Outsiders). In addition to S&P+, FEI, GE and F+, I've included FPI, which is ESPN's Monte Carlo analysis. The basic idea for this comparison I got from SaxonRBR on CFBSH, who does something similar for the upcoming SEC games each week.

This table summarizes the actual values and national rankings for M and all its opponents this season (both past & future games), and also applies a pseudo-color scale to the values relative to M's values, to make differentials more visually apparent. The color-coding goes along the lines of a threat-level:

Red => DangerTeam
Grey => sort of rhymes with "meh" ... statistical equivalence
Blue => as cool and inviting as the other side of the pillow

The statistical basis for unbridled hype and hysterical smack-talk is now complete. UM is favored in all of its remaining games in both the S&P+ and FPI indices, although clearly the difference between the associated spreads is significant.

As of this writing, the only game UM is not favored in (including it's prior games), is Utah, and only based on the FPI spread.

As has already been mentioned in other posts, but bears repeating here: the most difficult remaining game per S&P+ is Penn State, followed closely by Minny.

Lastly, shameless jumping to conclusions compels me to also mention that UM winning out would also include an additional victory over most-expected West division champion Iowa to earn its first outright Big Ten Championship since 2003. Yup. It's been 12 long years...

So, can anyone recommend any good hotels in Indianapolis? I think I might go ahead and at least reserve a room! BTW, my SO & I prefer non-chain, more boutique-type accommodations.

For the last few years, I've blatanly stolen Seth's idea to use advanced metrics both to fill out my Bowl Pick'Em and to decide on which games to watch. Two years ago, using this approach got me 69% correct picks in my pool, but last year things were a bit rougher - an FEI-based pick'em got 54% correct, while a Sagarin PREDICTOR based one got 57%. When something doesn't work, throw more data it. So I put together a more elaborate spreadsheet (available here) that presents picks from several different advanced metrics: FEI, Colley, Massey (Power), and Sagarin (new, improved GOLDEN MEAN).

The methodology is straightforward - I compared all the teams using these metrics, and using the difference between them picked the winners and the confidence in the picks. That is, a huge difference in the ratings of the teams suggests a lock, a difference of zero is a push. In addition to looking at these metrics individually, I also put together a composite score by standardizing all the values and averaging them together. The list automatically sorts based on the system you use, with locks at the top and coin-flips (and presumably more exciting games) at the bottom. Interestingly, the four different system present three different potential national title winners, but none of those include OSU, so take some small pleasure in that.

They aren't young - Only ONE starter who has been on campus less than 3 years (Lewis). They aren't lacking raw talent- only one starter who was less than a 3 star (Glasgow), and a total roster that includes 21 4 or 5 star recruits. ...but they are a mmediocre B1G defense.

So what is the story here????

...and why in the world do people keep talking about our "good" defense?

The guys at Football Outsiders have projected strength of schedule based on projected FEI rankings for the 2014 season. You can read about it here and here, and they have a fancy visualization of it here, but for those who don't want to read through the articles, here's the most relevant info:

Rank

Team

SOS

1

Utah

.063

2

Auburn

.063

3

Florida

.068

4

Texas A&M

.073

5

Tennessee

.073

6

Stanford

.074

7

Arkansas

.081

8

California

.089

9

Washington State

.090

10

Notre Dame

.096

31

Indiana

.178

33

Rutgers

.196

35

Illinois

.213

36

Michigan State

.213

38

Michigan

.214

48

Maryland

.240

50

Minnesota

.259

51

Nebraska

.269

62

Penn State

.319

63

Northwestern

.329

65

Purdue

.343

67

Ohio State

.360

72

Wisconsin

.370

98

Iowa

.560

SOS = "the likelihood than an elite team (two standard deviations better than average) would go undefeated against the given team's entire schedule. Stronger schedules have smaller SOS ratings."

Additionally, they have some other interesting statistics. Against Michigan's schedule,

60.7% is the likelihood that an elite team would lose one game or fewer.

88.3% is the likelihood that an elite team would lose two games or fewer.

0.2% is the likelihood that a good team (one st. deviation better than average) would go undefeated

4.9% is the likelihood that a good team would lose one game or fewer.

20.6% is the likelihood that a good team would lose two games or fewer.

50% is the likelihood that a good team would lose three games or fewer.

75% is the likelihood that a good team would lose four games or fewer.